Few areas are as sensitive as the area of law: the translator has no right to make any mistakes. Misinterpretation can have consequences which can be… literally speaking catastrophic. Five examples of mistakes in legal translations:
1851 : unclear treaty for abused Island
In 1851, when Spain and the Sultan of Sulu in the Philippines signed a peace treaty after three years of Spanish attacks, it seemed that the translation agency which they worked with didn’t feel concerned by the challenges of legal translation… How can one then understand that the Spaniards went away convinced that the Sultan had accepted their sovereignty, while the same Sultan considered that this was in fact a treaty between equal parts? And the story doesn’t stop there: in 1878, the same Sultanate signed an agreement with the British commercial syndicate. What was the problem? The English version described this as a sale, the sulu version as a rental…
1889 : power or duty, that is the question
In the Italo-Ethiopian Treaty of Perpetual Peace and Friendship signed in Wuchale in 1889, Article 17 states, in its Ethiopian version, that the African country would be «entitled to avail itself of the Italian government in its external relations». This version, written in Amharic, uses a verb expressing possibility; the Italian version, however, is a bit more restrictive: the verb in question expresses obligation. As a direct consequence : this formulation makes Ethiopia an Italian protectorate. As an indirect consequence : the first Italo-Ethiopian war.
1967: a mistake that pleases (almost) everybody
There are some legal translation mistakes that seem to have been tailor-made to please everybody. This is the case of Resolution 242 of the UN Security Council that was passed in 1967 following the Six Day War in Israel and Egypt. If the English version which was meant to satisfy the interests of the US and England, talks about an Israeli withdrawal « from occupied territories » (from the territories occupied during the recent conflict), the French version is much more restrictive and is better adapted to General de Gaulle’s views : it talks about a withdrawal « from the territories occupied during the recent conflict ».
1945 : and boom!
There are benign translation mistakes, serious translation mistakes and… catastrophic translation mistakes. At the end of July 1945, the Allies sent an ultimatum to Japan. The Japanese response contained the polysemic expression mokatsu, which can mean « think » but also « reject » or « ignore ». With the intention of saving time, the Japanese Prime Minister used mokatsu in the sense of « think ». However, the translator translated the term as « reject ». What was the outcome? Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
1991 : a past that is too present
From one bomb to another (and to finish on a lighter note) : Antónia Bálint, crowned Miss Hungary in 1991, lost her title some time later when various old nude pictures of her appearing in various publications had resurfaced. She’ll be rehabilitated in 1997 by the justice, with compensation for damages and interests. The year when Antónia won, the original settlement written in English had introduced the ban on publishing nude pictures in present and in future. The translation added the past…
Discover our translation agency